Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Fortinet Exam FCSS_SASE_AD-24 Topic 1 Question 5 Discussion

Actual exam question for Fortinet's FCSS_SASE_AD-24 exam
Question #: 5
Topic #: 1
[All FCSS_SASE_AD-24 Questions]

Refer to the exhibits.

A FortiSASE administrator is trying to configure FortiSASE as a spoke to a FortiGate hub. The tunnel is up to the FortiGale hub. However, the administrator is not able to ping the webserver hosted behind the FortiGate hub.

Based on the output, what is the reason for the ping failures?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

Brice
1 months ago
I'm gonna go with C. The BGP route not being received seems like the culprit here. Though I'm also tempted to blame the webserver for being too shy to come out and play. Maybe it's just camera-shy.
upvoted 0 times
Viola
6 days ago
B: I disagree, I believe it's D. NAT needs to be enabled on the spoke-to-hub policy.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gertude
8 days ago
A: I think it might be A. The SPA policy needs to allow PING service.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Berry
1 months ago
Ooh, option B is intriguing. Those quick mode selectors can be real tricky. It's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, but with IP subnets. Gotta watch out for those!
upvoted 0 times
...
Fannie
1 months ago
Option D sounds juicy. Maybe the NAT settings are messing things up. You know what they say, 'If in doubt, check the NAT!' Or was it, 'When in NAT, do as the NATs do'? I can never remember.
upvoted 0 times
Kanisha
20 days ago
User 1: I think you might be onto something with option D. NAT settings can definitely cause ping failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Dean
1 months ago
I'm going with option C. If the BGP route isn't being learned, that would explain why the webserver can't be reached. Gotta make sure those routing ducks are in a row.
upvoted 0 times
Mayra
24 days ago
User3: Agreed, ensuring the BGP route is received is crucial for proper connectivity in this setup.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristeen
26 days ago
User2: Yeah, that could definitely be causing the problem with reaching the webserver.
upvoted 0 times
...
Krissy
1 months ago
User1: I think option C makes sense. If the BGP route isn't received, that could be the issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Wendell
2 months ago
Hmm, the BGP route not being received sounds like the most likely issue. I mean, if the tunnel is up, the ping should work, right? Unless there's something funky going on with the routing.
upvoted 0 times
Rosio
25 days ago
Hmm, the BGP route not being received sounds like the most likely issue. I mean, if the tunnel is up, the ping should work, right? Unless there's something funky going on with the routing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bernadine
27 days ago
C) The BGP route is not received.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elza
1 months ago
B) Quick mode selectors are restricting the subnet.
upvoted 0 times
...
Xuan
1 months ago
A) The Secure Private Access (SPA) policy needs to allow PING service.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rosio
2 months ago
I believe the BGP route not being received could also be a possible reason for the ping failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evangelina
2 months ago
I think it could also be due to the Quick mode selectors restricting the subnet.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlene
2 months ago
I agree with Katina, the SPA policy might be the issue here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Katina
2 months ago
I think the reason for the ping failures is because the SPA policy needs to allow PING service.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77